Service animal in dugout?

[rbmartin]

I have never had this come up before. A local high school player with seizure issues has been assigned a service dog which can predict/prevent these events. I could not think of a reason why any reasonable person could object to this and found no reference in the NFHS book that may pertain to this.
Any reason why this animal cannot accompany the player in the dugout area before/during games?

[CT1]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

Any reason why this animal cannot accompany the player in the dugout area before/during games?

Since FED allows base coaches to have mobility devices, I suspect this is also legal.

As long as Brutus doesn't bark about close calls, that is.

[scrounge]

The rule book talks about the criteria for reasonable accomodations:

"The accommodations should not fundamentally alter the sport, allow an otherwise illegal piece of equipment, create risk to the athlete/others or place opponents at a disadvantage.".

Does a dog sitting in the dugout fundamentally alter the sport? Nope.
Does it allow an otherwise illegal piece of equipment? Nope.
Does it create a risk to the athlete/others? Unless the dog bites...nope.
Does it place opponents at a disadvantage? Barring an opponent with a very sensitive dog allergy, nope.

Absolutely legal in my opinion - wouldn't have any patience with anyone objecting either, a total jerk move and probably illegal actually.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

He's especially good if he bites the coach when the coach misbehaves.

[Crabby_Bob]

Dog Steals Glove

[bob jenkins]

We allow rats in the dugout, why wouldn't we allow dogs?

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

We allow rats in the dugout, why wouldn't we allow dogs?

LOL!!!!!!! I love it!!!!!!!!

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

We allow rats in the dugout, why wouldn't we allow dogs?

It's easier to trap rats.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by scrounge

The rule book talks about the criteria for reasonable accomodations:

"The accommodations should not fundamentally alter the sport, allow an otherwise illegal piece of equipment, create risk to the athlete/others or place opponents at a disadvantage.".

Does it place opponents at a disadvantage? Barring an opponent with a very sensitive dog allergy, nope.

And even so, the ADA (Disability Act) will trump the allergy. You must always allow a reasonable accomodation for disabilities as Scrounge found in the rules.

The quote above from Scrounge sums it up nicely.

[Moosie74]

Originally Posted by CT1

Since FED allows base coaches to have mobility devices, I suspect this is also legal.

As long as Brutus doesn't bark about close calls, that is.

I had a St. Bernard named Brutus, when he was a puppy my then wife would bring him to the game to watch me umpire. One night I had a banger at the plate, coach comes out to argue, walking quickly towards me. Brutus was barking at him because of the way he approached me. He proceeded to stare down the coach for the next inning. Just thought of that based on your comment!

[Matt]

Originally Posted by scrounge

Absolutely legal in my opinion - wouldn't have any patience with anyone objecting either, a total jerk move and probably illegal actually.

Agree. Any coach that does that would find himself on a short leash.

[RPatrino]

In High School the head coach can have basically anyone/anything he wants on his bench. That is his domain, until it affects the game, then it becomes our issue. And we take care of it.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Moosie74

I had a St. Bernard named Brutus, when he was a puppy my then wife would bring him to the game to watch me umpire. One night I had a banger at the plate, coach comes out to argue, walking quickly towards me. Brutus was barking at him because of the way he approached me. He proceeded to stare down the coach for the next inning. Just thought of that based on your comment!

Good dog!